Atorroa  of 

fflltarlfB  II.  Sroum 

pmri&rut  Hub#* 

jltmiriftal  Court  of  ftyUaMpljia 


\^v 


®lu’  (Eourta 
anil  %  ffrnpt? 


Atlantic  City,  N.  J. 
Map  31,  1919 


ADDRESS 

OF 

Charles  L.  Brown 

(President  Judge  Municipal  Court  of  Philadelphia) 

Before  the 

NATIONAL  PROBATION  ASSOCIATION 

THE  COURTS 
AND  THE  PEOPLE 

ATLANTIC  CITY,  N.  J. 

MAY  3lrt,  1919 


1A 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2017  with  funding  from 

University  of  Illinois  Urbana-Champaign  Alternates 


https  ://arch  i  ve  .org/detai  Is/cou  rtspeopleOObrow 


ADDRESS 


Ladies  and  gentlemen,  this  is  a  privilege.  You 
represent  authority  from  all  over  this  wide  land  of 
ours.  As  a  judge,  at  the  head  of  a  large  court,  it 
is  pleasant  to  come  in  contact  with  so  much  represen¬ 
tative  authority,  from  so  many  cities  and  States.  We 
can  afford  to  relax,  for  yours  is  an  association  that 
has  earned  an  enviable  reputation  throughout  the 
country — an  organization  that  is  growing,  and  will 
grow,  larger  and  larger  and  more  all-embracing  in 
its  work  and  in  its  membership. 

You,  who  are  here,  represent  the  connecting  link 
between  the  courts  and  the  people.  You  interpret 
the  courts  to  the  people  and  speak  for  the  people  to 
the  courts.  Therefore,  I  have  made  “The  Courts  and 
the  People”  my  topic  today. 

In1  this  day,  when  there  has  been  discussed  the  re¬ 
call  of  judicial  decisions,  even  the  recall  of  the  judges, 
this  subject  embodies  no  new  or  startling  idea;  how¬ 
ever,  I  wish  to  present  a  thought  about  the  courts 
and  the  people  from  a  new  angle,  one  that  has  been 
growing  upon  all  of  us,  judges,  court  officers,  and 
probation  officers,  social  service  workers,  and  all  those 
whose  hearts  are  in  the  great  work  of  social  justice 
for  the  people. 

What  are  we  going  to  do  to  bring  justice  nearer 
the  people  in  this  time  of  unrest  and  dissatisfaction? 

The  old  concept  of  the  courts  was  that  they  were 
cold,  dispassionate,  far  removed  from  the  human  side 
of  the  problems  that  confronted  them.  That  has 


3 


been  all  put  aside.  Today  the  courts  are  being 
socialized.  In  different  cities  and  different  States  the 
method  and  place  of  beginning  has  differed.  In  New 
York,  the  Magistrates’  Courts  have  been  socialized — 
brought  nearer  the  people.  In  our  city,  Philadelphia, 
and  elsewhere,  the  courts  have  changed.  The 
courts  have  new  viewpoints,  broad  social  vision  with 
large  staffs  to  be  helpful  in  the  solution  of  the  prob¬ 
lems  of  the  people.  We  have  new  powers  of  closer 
supervision  and  closer  scrutiny  and  investigation  into 
the  acts  of  the  individuals  that  come  to  us  asking 
justice,  or  that  are  brought  before  us  to  have  justice 
meted  out  to  them. 

The  people  of  the  various  communities  obtaining 
broader  opportunities  to  receive  social  justice  at  the 
same  time  have  given  to  the  courts  a  much  more 
elastic  power,  and  in  many  senses  a  more  arbitrary 
power  over  them,  through  the  probation  officers  and 
others. 

The  great  power  the  people  have  given  to  our 
courts  should  be  administered  in  the  spirit  in  which 
it  was  given. 

The  very  people  that  come  before  us  have  helped 
to  give  us  that  power.  We  have  come  to  feel  that 
we  are  doing  a  great  deal  in  return  for  our  clients, 
and  for  those  we  are  called  upon  to  judge,  when  we 
provide  social  supervision,  institutional  care,  medical 
oversight  and  treatment. 

Having  all  this  power,  we  must  not  consider  the 
family,  or  the  man  or  the  woman,  or  the  child  as  our 
Court’s  problem  that  we  are  solving.  We  must  think 
of  ourselves  as  if  we  were  on  the  other  side  of  the 
bar  of  justice — we  must  ask,  what  does  this  man  or 
tJhis  woman  or  this  child  think  of  his  or  her  own  prob¬ 
lem?  Though  we  possess  the  authority  to  decide  for 
them,  we  should  ask,  “What  do  you  think  of  your 
own  problem?”  “Of  your  own  situation?”  We  must 
even  ask,  “How  will  you  solve  it?”  “How  do  you 


4 


want  the  Court  to  help  you  get  out  of  this  situation 
or  this  difficulty?”  We  must  keep  in  mind  the 
thought,  “What  does  this  man  or  woman  expect  from 
justice?”  This  may  sound  radical  to  those  not  fa¬ 
miliar  with  our  modem  advance  in  juridical  procedure. 
But  those  of  us  familiar  with  human  problems  and 
the  law  know  that  just  as  we  have  discarded  nearly 
all  the  bandages  of  procedure  and  legal  evidence  in 
our  children’s  courts  and  in  our  family  courts,  so 
must  we  now  be  ready  for  a  new  step.  We  must  ad¬ 
mit  the  man  or  woman  who  is  before  the  court  into  a 
place  where  he  or  she  may  have  a  share  in  shaping 
the  legal  decision.  The  legal  decision  is  the  man’s 
future.  No  man’s  future  in  America  can  be  denied 
him.  If  asked  what  America  stands  for  I  would  say, 
America  is  the  land  where  the  individual  has  the  self- 
determination  of  his  own  future,  and  that  is  also  the 
right  of  the  man  or  woman  who  has  made  a  wrong 
step,  that  is  also  the  right  of  the  person  who  has 
offended  the  law.  This  is  one  of  the  great  problems 
facing  the  administration  of  justice  today. 

Justice,  in  the  modem  Social  Court,  should  lay 
aside  her  sword  and  cast  off  the  bandage  from  her 
eyes.  She  should  investigate  through  her  probation 
system  before  trial,  and  not  only  after  judgment,  and 
she  should  weigh  her  evidence  in  the  suppliant’s  pres¬ 
ence,  and  she  should  let  her  suppliant  see  what  she’s 
about. 

The  Salvation  Army  says,  “A  man  may  be  down, 
but  he’s  never  out.” 

There  is  unrest  all  over  the  world.  People  are 
restless  under  the  restraint  and  binding  strings  of 
authority.  The  world  has  grown.  People  ask  of 
the  Government,  of  the  courts,  of  you  and  of  me,  let 
us  share  in  the  solving  of  our  own  problems.  They 
want  to  do  their  own  social  work.  “We  want  to  de¬ 
cide  our  own  problems,”  they  say.  When  we  become 
disturbed  at  this,  let  us  recall  what  the  Talmud  said 


5 


more  than  a  thousand  years  ago,  “The  greatest  char¬ 
ity  is  to  show  a  man  how  to  help  himself.”  We  have 
come  to  the  day  in  our  courts  when  the  judges  must 
think  of  what  the  man  on  the  other  side  of  the  bar 
of  justice  thinks  of  the  solution  of  his  own  prob¬ 
lem,  and  it  is  through  the  probation  officer  that  he 
discovers  this. 

I  say  this  to  you  as  the  judge  of  a  court  that  has 
a  complete  and  elaborate  social  mechanism.  We  have 
social  workers,  medical  experts — the  greatest  in 
Philadelphia — investigators,  interpreters,  probation 
officers,  psychiatrists,  psychologists  and  the  co-op¬ 
erating  service  of  social  service  experts.  But  our 
ideal  is  not  to  use  the  service  for  ourselves,  but  to 
use  it  so  the  individual  whom  the  court  desires  to 
benefit  may  have  the  service  for  the  solution  of  his 
or  her  own  problems.  It  would  be  all  worthless  if  it 
were  not  so  exercised. 

Our  psychiatric  department  has  been  making  a 
detailed  study.  We  are  studying  impulses — conduct 
as  expressed  in  personality — inclination.  We  want 
to  know  in  which  direction  people  are  inclined,  where 
the  good  and  bad  impulses  lead  them.  The  modern 
emphasis  is  on  personality,  on  its  value  and  sacred¬ 
ness  ;  the  new  insistence  is  on  the  right  of  independent 
judgment.  Of  course,  we  all  know  that  there  are 
those  who  lack  the  mentality  or  the  will  for  it.  But 
how  many  are  there  who  come  to  our  courts  who 
have  both?  There  are  very  many,  and  it  is  those 
whose  futures  we  can  mar  by  overzealous  justice. 

Self-determination  of  the  individual  is  sound  Ameri¬ 
can  doctrine.  It  rings  through  the  Declaration  of 
Independence.  It  is  the  spirit  of  every  paragraph 
in  the  Constitution. 

It  is  often  said  that  England  has  an  unwritten 
Constitution  that  makes  England  a  great  democratic 
country.  During  the  war,  the  thought  has  at  times 
been  expressed  that  England  is  more  democratic  than 

6 


we  are  because  England’s  unwritten  Constitution  is 
more  elastic  than  ours.  But  we  also  have  an  unwrit¬ 
ten  Constitution.  We  have  our  unwritten  American 
ideal,  and  all  that  has  been  said  is  summed  up  in  the 
American  ideal  of  individual  self-expression  and  lib¬ 
erty,  responsible  to  conscience  and  the  State  only. 
The  wrorld  has  never  known  a  greater  ideal. 

There  are  many  social  courts  in  America  imbued 
with  this  new  ideal  of  justice.  In  many  cities,  we  in 
Philadelphia,  others  in  Cleveland,  Cincinnati,  Chicago, 
New  York,  Boston,  the  probation  officer’s  task  goes 
behind  and  beyond  the  court.  In  Philadelphia,  his 
task  nowadays  does  not  begin  after  sentence  is  passed. 
He  works  with  all  the  organizations,  civic,  children’s 
legal  aid,  societies  to  protect  children,  etc.  He  and 
they  plan  with  the  individual,  and  in  very  many  cases 
the  judge’s  decision  depends  on  these  plans  and  re¬ 
ports  and  may  be  predetermined  by  them.  But  we 
all  hope  to  see  the  circle  of  united  endeavor  widen 
and  widen  so  that  the  individual  may  receive  the 
greatest  benefit. 

Revolving  the  thought  in  my  mind,  it  impresses 
me  what  a  wonderful  cohesive  power  all  this  co-opera¬ 
tion  has,  and,  seeing  how  representative  you  are,  I 
thought  what  great  stimulus  this  national  organiza¬ 
tion  of  ours  gives  all  this  co-operation,  that  it  would 
help  us  all  to  do  greater  and  better  work  if  we  called 
into  the  membership  of  this  national  organization 
more  of  the  people  that  are  working  with  us.  Not 
only  those  in  the  courts,  but  in  the  District  Attorney’s 
offices,  in  the  legal  aid  societies,  in  the  desertion  bu¬ 
reaus,  in  the  children’s  societies,  in  the  psychopathic 
laboratories  and  elsewhere.  This  organization  has  a 
wonderful  power  for  national  co-operation  and  good 
in  the  broad  field  of  social  justice,  and  I  hope  you 
will  expand  and  grow  to  perform  even  a  greater  work. 

In  conclusion,  I  will  read  you  the  poem  of  Sam 
Walter  Foss,  who  had  his  inspiration  for  its  writing 


7 


from  Homer,  and  if  you  have  your  heart  in  your 
work  you  are  living  this  life  today : 

“THE  HOUSE  BY  THE  SIDE  OF  THE  ROAD.” 

“He  was  a  friend  to  man ,  and  lived  in  a  house  by  the  side 
of  the  road  .” — Homer. 

There  are  hermit  souls  that  live  withdrawn 
In  the  peace  of  their  self-content; 

There  are  souls,  like  stars,  that  dwell  apart, 

In  a  fellowless  firmament; 

There  are  pioneer  souls  that  blaze  their  paths 
Where  highways  never  ran; — 

But  let  me  live  by  the  side  of  the  road 
And  be  a  friend  to  man. 

I  see  from  my  house  by  the  side  of  the  road, 

By  the  side  of  the  highway  of  life, 

The  men  who  press  with  the  ardor  of  hope, 

The  men  who  are  faint  with  the  strife. 

But  I  turn  not  away  from  their  smiles  nor  their  tears, 
Both  parts  of  an  infinite  plan; — 

Let  me  live  in  my  house  by  the  side  of  the  road 
And  be  a  friend  to  man. 

Let  me  live  in  a  house  by  the  side  of  the  road, 

Where  the  race  of  men  go  by — 

The  men  who  are  good  and  the  men  who  are  bad, 

As  good  and  as  bad  as  I. 

I  would  not  sit  in  the  scorner’s  seat, 

Or  hurl  the  cynic’s  ban; — 

Let  me  live  in  a  house  by  the  side  of  the  road 
And  be  a  friend  to  man. 


— Sam  Walter  Foss. 


* 


